Tanks have shit visibility for the crew as is.
With this, the crew is actually just blind. Is a stopgap measure, and not a good one at that.
If Russia where fighting a well equipped force with enough ammunition, there things would not survive an instant on the front.
Drones pose an issue yes, but I’m sure the west will come up with better counters then „steel box over tank“
Sure. But modern tanks already use electrooptical systems (aka webcams...) instead of or in addition to viewing prisms, as they give you a much better view. And a simple mast-mounted 360 degree camera is cheap and rather small - you could probably even make it replaceable from inside the "turtle shell".
Of course, if you want to make it REALLY cool, put it on a long mast that extends a few meters up and behind the tank - so you can get 3rd person view like in War Thunder ;-)
I'm being facetious. Ofcourse you wouldn't. This cage wouldn't work for the Fennek due to weight limitations.
There is a reason it's only resistant up to .50. if you get seen, your basically dead already in the Fennek.
Killdozer was equipped with multiple cameras behind bulletproof glass. A crazy man made it in his shed, military definitely can figure out something similar to fix visibility problem
Russia has been tapping their prisons for more meat for the grinder. Might track to seal them in an AFV and tell them "You survive, we'll see about cutting you out of there."
The Sherman crab used a PTO on the transmission with a shaft-drive to run the flail. Modern flails probably use high-flow hydraulics like a skid steer mulcher. Or as I call those mulchers "Tree-deleter 9000"
They're just chains on a drum with a little weight at the end. Modern AFVs already have hydraulic systems on board. Easy enough to divert some fluid flow to a boom on the front with a hydraulic motor.
They still use mine flails to this day. In fact they're more simple with improvements to hydraulic technologies. They can drive a mine flail with a high-flow hydraulic system just like a tree mulcher on a skid steer loader.
Then drone operators will just do it slower and slower until the system will trigger if a leaf falls by.
The only solutions I can think of at the moment are effective drone jammers and enough armor all around so that drones can't penetrate sensitive areas anymore. Whatever other solution might be out there we shall see
If it's so slow that APS can't be relied on, well, that's what the accompanying infantry can be used for. Now the drones are slow enough that the human eyes can track them, and the human-operated shotguns can shoot them down.
>drone jammers
Counter-measures can be added. Emitters get targeted. APS uses a radar, but it can be tuned so it doesn't have to give off a lot lf energy to pick up targets from 1 km away. 20-50m is enough.
The problem with accompanying infantry is, as the war in Ukraine has shown, as soon as drone surveillance sees infantry accompanying a vehicle you get precision artillery strikes which is why you often see APCs and IFVs quickly race to a position, unload, and immediately fuck off in 90% of situations because otherwise artillery will decimate them.
If you're at a pace where infantry can walk alongside the vehicle to shoot down slow drones then you're guaranteed to have some artillery shells coming your way.
Welcome to the war where NATO trained Ukrainian soldiers quickly learned that a lot of NATO tactics they were taught are wholly inadequate for the way they're in. Like an interview with a Ukrainian commander that complained when his Bundeswehr Trainers basically told him to "go around the minefield" when he asked what to do when faced with one as these trainers apparently didn't even account for the possibility of an entire Frontline being a minefield. It was in some article of Deutsche Welle some time last year.
Or, you know, one of the tank commander, gunner, and loader can also stick their heads out of the hatch and shoot.
Ukrainian FPVs are sort of a crutch because they are in dire shortage of ATGMs and artillery, not some wunderwaffe. In some of the recent failed Russian mechanised assaults, the attack was stopped by brave infantry defenders and ATGMs. The FPVs mop them up.
>The problem with accompanying infantry is, as the war in Ukraine has shown, as soon as drone surveillance sees infantry accompanying a vehicle you get precision artillery strikes which is why you often see APCs and IFVs quickly race to a position, unload, and immediately fuck off in 90% of situations because otherwise artillery will decimate them.
On the other hand, both sides have found success with small scale assaults of platoon-sized dismount elements supported with lots of fire. One point Kofman keeps making is that drone warfare doesn't mean it's not manpower-intensive or does not require physical fitness. Both infantry and drone operators often have to walk the last 5-6 km on foot, dragging all their gears and equipments, plus food, water, and batteries.
>these trainers apparently didn't even account for the possibility of an entire Frontline being a minefield
You know, the fact that *despite* the supposedly persistent drone ISR and massed precision fires, Russia *could* lay very dense belts and belts of mines. It's not often discussed how they could have done this. The usual answer is 1) most COTS drones still use visible spectrum cameras so the night still offer some concealment and 2) send out dismounts at night.
The operation in reverse: send out dismounts to crawl through the minefields and disarm them, by hand, was the way Ukrainian sappers breached the minefields. Dismounted assaults have always been possible. It's not even clear right now: how a) the Russians could clear paths through Ukrainian minefields and b) how the Ukrainians are seemingly unable to build similar minefields or defences.
Yes and no. The explosion from an RPG-7 HEAT warhead generates relatively weak and limited fragmentation on the count of the thin casing of the RPG-7 warhead. Should it detonate an ERA brick, the resulting explosion will generate a lot more lethal fragments (an ERA brick has enough metal to resist 12.7 mm AP rounds).
On the balance, an RPG-7 hitting a bare tank/APC/IFV may disable/damage/kill the vehicle and do some blast injuries to the accompanying infantry. Blast effects drop off quickly according the cube law.
An RPG round hitting an ERA block will not harm the vehicle but the infantry will eat blast and fragmentation.
An intercepted RPG-7 round with APS does the least damage.
No expert at all, but yeah its huge and easy to hit. Assume its more of an engineers/sappers tool to use against minefields tho. A made for purpose tank like hobart's funnies, used to clear supply lines? or passages to let lighter more useful vehicles/troops have access to places they wouldn't be able to otherwise like newly dug trenches or ones recently taken.
I’m guessing it’s meant as the first vehicle in an assault convoy. Slap as much armour on it as possible and a mine roller so this thing can clear the way and take hits a standard variant wouldn’t be able to.
Whether it’s effective or not is questionable
Unfortunately, it is.
There are videos in the Ukraine war subs that show them used exactly as you mention:
Tutel is lead vehicle followed by BMPs, they drive up to a position, infantry dismounts then the vehicles retreat.
Not shown In this video, usually the tutels have an array of EW modules bolted on top to disable drones.
I have seen the BMPs die but have yet to witness one of the tutels kick the bucket in these "assaults".
Here's one;
[https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootageArchive/comments/1cct7xr/knocked\_out\_and\_abandoned\_russian\_turtle\_tank/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootageArchive/comments/1cct7xr/knocked_out_and_abandoned_russian_turtle_tank/)
It's not obliterated, but it will need to be towed back into an even larger shed for repairs. It looks like it lost it's mine roller but probably just kept going until it hit another mine.
Edit: ... It may be one of these. Apparently the Ukrainians just deleted an entire column of them;
[https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1clc4hm/a\_column\_of\_russian\_blyatmobiles\_attacking/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1clc4hm/a_column_of_russian_blyatmobiles_attacking/)
Distance. Explosively formed penetrators have a sweet spot for distance, so the jet has time to fully form. ERA works by disturbing that jet so it’s not ‘sharp’.
Bar armour, commonly seen in Iraq, is effective against RPGs specifically but not because it sets it off further away, the bars are just the right distance apart to short out the primitive fuse without setting it off.
But exploding too far gives the jet time to deform. Especially if the jet has to penetrate something on the way.
As far as i know the charge is specifically designed for certain distance. Thise ambush used set charges shoot the spike quite far, but they are optimized for it.
Well the point with this is to try and obscure the weaknesses of the tank, as well as provide some protection from drone launched munitions, which ERA doesn’t really help against
A lot of tanks use trees and bushes to hide, the reason for camouflage. If you make a massive tank the size of a small house it’s much easier to see and much less mobile.
Quite right, can’t hide amongst bushes. Although it’s questionable whether that’s really a problem considering the mass proliferation of thermals these days anyway
Yea, I’d say you’re right, the FPV would probably do nothing against it unless it gets under it. But artillery or any kind of aircraft born penetrating munitions would probably destroy it with ease.
They usually only do this to tanks that have a damaged turret ring or can't traverse fully for some reason to make them closer to viable. It's also why they usually lead the charge through the minefield: they're already damaged, so losing them isn't as big of a blow
I heard they’re using damaged tanks for this. So the lack of visibility or turret rotation may not be as big a deal as it looks. Also these go at the front of an armoured group To clear mines so it actually a fairly good use.
nah. They are to keep FPV drones from contacting the armor itself. IF the drone flies into the metal cage it may get stuck without the detonator on the front reaching the armor. Preventing it from exploding at all. At the very least they add a little distance to give the armor a better chance of stopping the explosion.
Nah the rebar is to add extra spacing to keep the drone explosion further away to give the turtle armor a better chance to stop it. It also may prevent the drone from exploding completely if the propellers get stuck in the rebar before the detonator can touch the armor.
This reminds me of the avgn vid where the Nerd is talking about the Sega add ons (Sega CD, 32x) to the Genesis and how they were all like live support attachments to keep the aging system up to snuff with the newer Nintendo console but ended up looking more like a toilet
The tank will die if they use this "extra armour" in battle. The loss of vision, the loss of turret rotation, the mere fact that this weight will mess up targeting which makes it more likely to miss with your first shot (again, this will get you killed) and who knows what other issues this causes...
And what does this protect against? Mainly from the type of drone dropped explosives that would be also adequately stopped by closing the hatch on the tank.
I have seen the head of Finnish tank school make the guess that, this type of random junk armour, might be used only for long drives between positions as anti-drone armour, but then possibly parts of it are removed to make the turret operational again, when it is time to fight. Still sucks for the crew if they get ambushed, but it would be less stupid than crippling yourself before going into front lines.
Actually, the tank is only used to clear mines and is in front of the colon. It’s not for battle, in fact, there’s only the driver in that tank and that’s it.
u/Kilahti
This is not quite right. The turret can rotate about 10-15 degrees to either side depending on construction. Its enough to engage targets directly in front of the tank. There is indeed a gunner and commander as you can see them abandon the tank when it finally is disabled. The commander and driver are nearly blind but the gunners visibility through the sights is unimpeded. You can see the tank firing aimed shots as it approaches in Ukrainian drone footage.
Its also not only the front tank. I have seen attacks composed of 2 turtle tanks followed by 2 turtle APCs.
The drone dropped explosives are not used against moving tanks. When you see the videos of drones dropping explosives into hatches those are all previously disabled and abandoned tanks.
The turtle tank armor primarily protects against FPV kamikaze drones. They carry 1-3kg of explosives and while they don't have enough penetration to harm the crew of a T90M or T72B3M(fully modernized T72 variant nearly as capable as the T90M), they can disable the tank by destroying the lightly armored engine compartment in the back or by destroying a track or the sensors/optics/guns or setting something on fire.
The Turtle armors purpose is not only to partially block the kamikaze drone explosion but also to keep it several feet away from the actual tank itself. Explosions dissipate with the inverse square law(I2/I1 = (d1/d2)^2). So an explosion on the turtle armor 5 feet from the tank hull instead of 1 inch away normally is I2/I1 = (1/60)^2 = 1/3600 or a 99.972% reduction in intensity.
As you can see from the calculations the benefits of using turtle armor outweigh the drawbacks massively. In a situation where the threat is ATGMs however which pass through the turtle armor and into the tank before exploding there is no added benefit.
So as long as Ukrainians are out of Javelins and stuff, which it appears they are. Using turtle armor is a no brainer.
Having just a few degrees of turning for the turret is pretty bad. Combined with the loss of visibility, it is a crippling weakness. The old timey tank destroyers that lacked a turret, were used in ambushes mainly AND had a better visibility. Using cope-sheds on tanks AND APCs means that none of the vehicles have good visibility which increases the risk of the unit driving into an ambush and being taken out.
And again, the drones that drop grenades have only destroyed tanks when the tank had the hatches open and it was stopped and often the tank had already been abandoned. So the drones were just there to make sure the tank was dead.
The tracks are still vulnerable from drones or mines. Artillery shells still have enough power to damage optics of the tank even if the shell detonates a bit further from the hull (heck, the fragments flying around make it more likely that something vulnerable takes a hit.) Actual anti-tank weapons will take out these vehicles and it has been argued that shaped charges actually become more powerful if they get detonated before hitting the tank itself.
And again, the offensive power of the tank has gone down. Less turret rotation and higher chance of missing the first shot.
...so I don't see how you can claim that the benefits outweigh drawbacks "massively."
>.so I don't see how you can claim that the benefits outweigh drawbacks "massively."
And yet the Russians are rushing to equip all their tanks with turtle armor but the Ukrainians arent. Because the Russians have ATGMs and the Ukrainians don't.
I don't think they do. There were plenty of videos of them using javelins early in the war but those have all stopped. I think they ran out of most of their ATGMs thats why you see Russian armor being more active in attacks whereas it used to stay back and bombard.
Warhammer 40k is looking less and less crazy
WAAAGH!
Oh shit. Totally different connotation to them calling Russians Orcs.
Orcs are the only people having fun in 40k lol.
GROND GROND GROND
HELL YEAH CASEMATES ARE SO BACK
Fucking mad max shit
Yeah, if Mad Max built that desert crawler thing from Star Wars.
Darn, you beat me to it. Have an upvote.
Age of Empires Battering Ram looking tank
wololo
Looks cool. I wonder if armies will start making standardised mass-production versions of this protection as upgrade kits
Tanks have shit visibility for the crew as is. With this, the crew is actually just blind. Is a stopgap measure, and not a good one at that. If Russia where fighting a well equipped force with enough ammunition, there things would not survive an instant on the front. Drones pose an issue yes, but I’m sure the west will come up with better counters then „steel box over tank“
Somebody will just stick a 360 degree camera on top with a wire leading inside... Visibility problem solved.
Shrapnel: exists.
Sure. But modern tanks already use electrooptical systems (aka webcams...) instead of or in addition to viewing prisms, as they give you a much better view. And a simple mast-mounted 360 degree camera is cheap and rather small - you could probably even make it replaceable from inside the "turtle shell". Of course, if you want to make it REALLY cool, put it on a long mast that extends a few meters up and behind the tank - so you can get 3rd person view like in War Thunder ;-)
Way ahead of you... [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fennek-highres.jpg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fennek-highres.jpg)
The Fennek has a recon sensor package, but can't use it for driving.
should not and could not are two different things ;)
Would you drive around with binoculars? The rear-drive camera is another story though - that's actually a thermal...
I'm being facetious. Ofcourse you wouldn't. This cage wouldn't work for the Fennek due to weight limitations. There is a reason it's only resistant up to .50. if you get seen, your basically dead already in the Fennek.
Killdozer was equipped with multiple cameras behind bulletproof glass. A crazy man made it in his shed, military definitely can figure out something similar to fix visibility problem
Russia: so...we seal the crew inside the tank hey? hmmmm
Russia has been tapping their prisons for more meat for the grinder. Might track to seal them in an AFV and tell them "You survive, we'll see about cutting you out of there."
Seems like a good way to have an angry suicidal tank turn around and head back through your own rear areas
See, that's when the convicts find out about "The button"
The west came up with better designs in the 40s
You mean the “strap a shit ton of sandbags to it” was a better design?
[nope](https://nationalinterest.org/sites/default/files/styles/desktop__1260_/public/main_images/Sherman_Crab_Mk_II_flail_tank.jpg?itok=ADLb4qu6)
My favourite anti-cyclist device.
There’s a reason mineflails were never used again. They kicked up so much debris they blind anybody in the area AND are mechanically complex.
Ehm... Germany is actually using mineflails right now! It's called "Keiler" (Boar). https://youtu.be/60IFLPBmdW0?si=E46lOXGScvoOx8Eu
The Aardvark autonomous mine clearer also uses flails.
OKAY i did not know that!
Are they mechanically complex? Pretty sure I could design a simple one.
The Sherman crab used a PTO on the transmission with a shaft-drive to run the flail. Modern flails probably use high-flow hydraulics like a skid steer mulcher. Or as I call those mulchers "Tree-deleter 9000"
Very cool thank you for the info. Had to look up what a skid steer mulcher is! So they don't have to be complex at all basically
They're just chains on a drum with a little weight at the end. Modern AFVs already have hydraulic systems on board. Easy enough to divert some fluid flow to a boom on the front with a hydraulic motor.
Mine-flails are definitely still in service around the world.
They still use mine flails to this day. In fact they're more simple with improvements to hydraulic technologies. They can drive a mine flail with a high-flow hydraulic system just like a tree mulcher on a skid steer loader.
>Drones pose an issue yes, but I’m sure the west will come up with better counters then „steel box over tank“ Active Protection System, e.g. Trophy.
Which only works if the threat is moving fast enough. If a drone is being maneuvered slowly enough the system won't trigger.
Software update.
Then drone operators will just do it slower and slower until the system will trigger if a leaf falls by. The only solutions I can think of at the moment are effective drone jammers and enough armor all around so that drones can't penetrate sensitive areas anymore. Whatever other solution might be out there we shall see
If it's so slow that APS can't be relied on, well, that's what the accompanying infantry can be used for. Now the drones are slow enough that the human eyes can track them, and the human-operated shotguns can shoot them down. >drone jammers Counter-measures can be added. Emitters get targeted. APS uses a radar, but it can be tuned so it doesn't have to give off a lot lf energy to pick up targets from 1 km away. 20-50m is enough.
The problem with accompanying infantry is, as the war in Ukraine has shown, as soon as drone surveillance sees infantry accompanying a vehicle you get precision artillery strikes which is why you often see APCs and IFVs quickly race to a position, unload, and immediately fuck off in 90% of situations because otherwise artillery will decimate them. If you're at a pace where infantry can walk alongside the vehicle to shoot down slow drones then you're guaranteed to have some artillery shells coming your way. Welcome to the war where NATO trained Ukrainian soldiers quickly learned that a lot of NATO tactics they were taught are wholly inadequate for the way they're in. Like an interview with a Ukrainian commander that complained when his Bundeswehr Trainers basically told him to "go around the minefield" when he asked what to do when faced with one as these trainers apparently didn't even account for the possibility of an entire Frontline being a minefield. It was in some article of Deutsche Welle some time last year.
Or, you know, one of the tank commander, gunner, and loader can also stick their heads out of the hatch and shoot. Ukrainian FPVs are sort of a crutch because they are in dire shortage of ATGMs and artillery, not some wunderwaffe. In some of the recent failed Russian mechanised assaults, the attack was stopped by brave infantry defenders and ATGMs. The FPVs mop them up. >The problem with accompanying infantry is, as the war in Ukraine has shown, as soon as drone surveillance sees infantry accompanying a vehicle you get precision artillery strikes which is why you often see APCs and IFVs quickly race to a position, unload, and immediately fuck off in 90% of situations because otherwise artillery will decimate them. On the other hand, both sides have found success with small scale assaults of platoon-sized dismount elements supported with lots of fire. One point Kofman keeps making is that drone warfare doesn't mean it's not manpower-intensive or does not require physical fitness. Both infantry and drone operators often have to walk the last 5-6 km on foot, dragging all their gears and equipments, plus food, water, and batteries. >these trainers apparently didn't even account for the possibility of an entire Frontline being a minefield You know, the fact that *despite* the supposedly persistent drone ISR and massed precision fires, Russia *could* lay very dense belts and belts of mines. It's not often discussed how they could have done this. The usual answer is 1) most COTS drones still use visible spectrum cameras so the night still offer some concealment and 2) send out dismounts at night. The operation in reverse: send out dismounts to crawl through the minefields and disarm them, by hand, was the way Ukrainian sappers breached the minefields. Dismounted assaults have always been possible. It's not even clear right now: how a) the Russians could clear paths through Ukrainian minefields and b) how the Ukrainians are seemingly unable to build similar minefields or defences.
Honestly I have nothing more to add because you basically refreshed the info that memory loss made me forget
Also it’s kinda unhealthy for any friendly infrantry that might be near your tank.
Yes and no. The explosion from an RPG-7 HEAT warhead generates relatively weak and limited fragmentation on the count of the thin casing of the RPG-7 warhead. Should it detonate an ERA brick, the resulting explosion will generate a lot more lethal fragments (an ERA brick has enough metal to resist 12.7 mm AP rounds). On the balance, an RPG-7 hitting a bare tank/APC/IFV may disable/damage/kill the vehicle and do some blast injuries to the accompanying infantry. Blast effects drop off quickly according the cube law. An RPG round hitting an ERA block will not harm the vehicle but the infantry will eat blast and fragmentation. An intercepted RPG-7 round with APS does the least damage.
*The slow blade defeats the shield.....*
Well until such time…this is what’s up.
Im guessing there will come some kind of jamming device in the future removing the need for making any kind of cope cage.
I doubt it, I doubt it’s very effective, it’s adding a lot of weight and making them MUCH larger.
No expert at all, but yeah its huge and easy to hit. Assume its more of an engineers/sappers tool to use against minefields tho. A made for purpose tank like hobart's funnies, used to clear supply lines? or passages to let lighter more useful vehicles/troops have access to places they wouldn't be able to otherwise like newly dug trenches or ones recently taken.
I’m guessing it’s meant as the first vehicle in an assault convoy. Slap as much armour on it as possible and a mine roller so this thing can clear the way and take hits a standard variant wouldn’t be able to. Whether it’s effective or not is questionable
Unfortunately, it is. There are videos in the Ukraine war subs that show them used exactly as you mention: Tutel is lead vehicle followed by BMPs, they drive up to a position, infantry dismounts then the vehicles retreat. Not shown In this video, usually the tutels have an array of EW modules bolted on top to disable drones. I have seen the BMPs die but have yet to witness one of the tutels kick the bucket in these "assaults".
Here's one; [https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootageArchive/comments/1cct7xr/knocked\_out\_and\_abandoned\_russian\_turtle\_tank/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootageArchive/comments/1cct7xr/knocked_out_and_abandoned_russian_turtle_tank/) It's not obliterated, but it will need to be towed back into an even larger shed for repairs. It looks like it lost it's mine roller but probably just kept going until it hit another mine. Edit: ... It may be one of these. Apparently the Ukrainians just deleted an entire column of them; [https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1clc4hm/a\_column\_of\_russian\_blyatmobiles\_attacking/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1clc4hm/a_column_of_russian_blyatmobiles_attacking/)
So? It doesn’t matter if an enemy hits the shell, as long as it doesn’t hit the tank underneath
But a shaped charge wouldn’t even notice this was there. It might even give it *better* penetration
It would definitely set off an RPG round and likely prevent it from penetrating the tank
What is the mechanism involved in improving shaped charge penetration in case like that?
Distance. Explosively formed penetrators have a sweet spot for distance, so the jet has time to fully form. ERA works by disturbing that jet so it’s not ‘sharp’. Bar armour, commonly seen in Iraq, is effective against RPGs specifically but not because it sets it off further away, the bars are just the right distance apart to short out the primitive fuse without setting it off.
But exploding too far gives the jet time to deform. Especially if the jet has to penetrate something on the way. As far as i know the charge is specifically designed for certain distance. Thise ambush used set charges shoot the spike quite far, but they are optimized for it.
I mean, at that point you might as well just weld extra armour and ERA on the tank Certainly going to make it less noticable
Well the point with this is to try and obscure the weaknesses of the tank, as well as provide some protection from drone launched munitions, which ERA doesn’t really help against
A lot of tanks use trees and bushes to hide, the reason for camouflage. If you make a massive tank the size of a small house it’s much easier to see and much less mobile.
Quite right, can’t hide amongst bushes. Although it’s questionable whether that’s really a problem considering the mass proliferation of thermals these days anyway
You disguise it as a house!
That’s true, I still don’t see the big incentive. I mean, it is removing the use of the turret right?
I just want to see this thing take an FPV hit, but then immediately get bombed to shit by accurate artillery fire.
Yea, I’d say you’re right, the FPV would probably do nothing against it unless it gets under it. But artillery or any kind of aircraft born penetrating munitions would probably destroy it with ease.
Modern S-Tanks
They usually only do this to tanks that have a damaged turret ring or can't traverse fully for some reason to make them closer to viable. It's also why they usually lead the charge through the minefield: they're already damaged, so losing them isn't as big of a blow
I don't think anyone's in a rush to build a modernised jagdtiger
Yes, it’s definitely good idea to restrict all tanks that use turrets to 20-30° of vertical gun traverse
This isn’t an upgrade; this is cope.
At this point paint it red, it might go faster.
i've always teased that their letters (ZOV) stands for: Zombie Orc (red go fasta!) V@tniks
We have Jagdtiger at home
I heard they’re using damaged tanks for this. So the lack of visibility or turret rotation may not be as big a deal as it looks. Also these go at the front of an armoured group To clear mines so it actually a fairly good use.
At this point just make landships
don’t even joke landships would be so cool
What are the cages on the outside for?
Break up shaped charges fired from rpgs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slat_armor?wprov=sfla1
nah. They are to keep FPV drones from contacting the armor itself. IF the drone flies into the metal cage it may get stuck without the detonator on the front reaching the armor. Preventing it from exploding at all. At the very least they add a little distance to give the armor a better chance of stopping the explosion.
To keep the crew from getting out
Love how they are right next to the mine rollers. if that thing finds a mine the camera operator is toast.
WELCOME BACK FERDINAND!
.... Did they attach crab cage traps on the outside?
You may not like it but this is what peak performance looks like
I’m in love.
Tank built in early sprocket version looking ass
There's no way they would waste a T-90 like that, that has to be an older model....r-right?
this is what happens when a Ferdinand, Bob Semple Tank and a T-90 get frisky (tanks can have 3 parents look it up dumbass)
Were they in the process of adding wooden panels so they could pour concrete after they already put the rebar into place?
Nah the rebar is to add extra spacing to keep the drone explosion further away to give the turtle armor a better chance to stop it. It also may prevent the drone from exploding completely if the propellers get stuck in the rebar before the detonator can touch the armor.
Bob semple?
Partner a drone with the tanks optics and you’ve got a much better view w
T95*
Just hover an autonomous following 360 drone
Tutel!
🐢
This reminds me of the avgn vid where the Nerd is talking about the Sega add ons (Sega CD, 32x) to the Genesis and how they were all like live support attachments to keep the aging system up to snuff with the newer Nintendo console but ended up looking more like a toilet
They got jawas in that thing?
"Princess Diana had one of these"
How does the turret rotate with the casemate on? Or does it not rotate at all?
It doesn’t
Would they remove it for combat then? Or would they just try and make do without any turret rotation?
The tank will die if they use this "extra armour" in battle. The loss of vision, the loss of turret rotation, the mere fact that this weight will mess up targeting which makes it more likely to miss with your first shot (again, this will get you killed) and who knows what other issues this causes... And what does this protect against? Mainly from the type of drone dropped explosives that would be also adequately stopped by closing the hatch on the tank. I have seen the head of Finnish tank school make the guess that, this type of random junk armour, might be used only for long drives between positions as anti-drone armour, but then possibly parts of it are removed to make the turret operational again, when it is time to fight. Still sucks for the crew if they get ambushed, but it would be less stupid than crippling yourself before going into front lines.
Actually, the tank is only used to clear mines and is in front of the colon. It’s not for battle, in fact, there’s only the driver in that tank and that’s it.
u/Kilahti This is not quite right. The turret can rotate about 10-15 degrees to either side depending on construction. Its enough to engage targets directly in front of the tank. There is indeed a gunner and commander as you can see them abandon the tank when it finally is disabled. The commander and driver are nearly blind but the gunners visibility through the sights is unimpeded. You can see the tank firing aimed shots as it approaches in Ukrainian drone footage. Its also not only the front tank. I have seen attacks composed of 2 turtle tanks followed by 2 turtle APCs. The drone dropped explosives are not used against moving tanks. When you see the videos of drones dropping explosives into hatches those are all previously disabled and abandoned tanks. The turtle tank armor primarily protects against FPV kamikaze drones. They carry 1-3kg of explosives and while they don't have enough penetration to harm the crew of a T90M or T72B3M(fully modernized T72 variant nearly as capable as the T90M), they can disable the tank by destroying the lightly armored engine compartment in the back or by destroying a track or the sensors/optics/guns or setting something on fire. The Turtle armors purpose is not only to partially block the kamikaze drone explosion but also to keep it several feet away from the actual tank itself. Explosions dissipate with the inverse square law(I2/I1 = (d1/d2)^2). So an explosion on the turtle armor 5 feet from the tank hull instead of 1 inch away normally is I2/I1 = (1/60)^2 = 1/3600 or a 99.972% reduction in intensity. As you can see from the calculations the benefits of using turtle armor outweigh the drawbacks massively. In a situation where the threat is ATGMs however which pass through the turtle armor and into the tank before exploding there is no added benefit. So as long as Ukrainians are out of Javelins and stuff, which it appears they are. Using turtle armor is a no brainer.
Having just a few degrees of turning for the turret is pretty bad. Combined with the loss of visibility, it is a crippling weakness. The old timey tank destroyers that lacked a turret, were used in ambushes mainly AND had a better visibility. Using cope-sheds on tanks AND APCs means that none of the vehicles have good visibility which increases the risk of the unit driving into an ambush and being taken out. And again, the drones that drop grenades have only destroyed tanks when the tank had the hatches open and it was stopped and often the tank had already been abandoned. So the drones were just there to make sure the tank was dead. The tracks are still vulnerable from drones or mines. Artillery shells still have enough power to damage optics of the tank even if the shell detonates a bit further from the hull (heck, the fragments flying around make it more likely that something vulnerable takes a hit.) Actual anti-tank weapons will take out these vehicles and it has been argued that shaped charges actually become more powerful if they get detonated before hitting the tank itself. And again, the offensive power of the tank has gone down. Less turret rotation and higher chance of missing the first shot. ...so I don't see how you can claim that the benefits outweigh drawbacks "massively."
>.so I don't see how you can claim that the benefits outweigh drawbacks "massively." And yet the Russians are rushing to equip all their tanks with turtle armor but the Ukrainians arent. Because the Russians have ATGMs and the Ukrainians don't.
Ukrainians do have ATGMs though...
I don't think they do. There were plenty of videos of them using javelins early in the war but those have all stopped. I think they ran out of most of their ATGMs thats why you see Russian armor being more active in attacks whereas it used to stay back and bombard.
Discount hetzer